Re: issue 4: how to signal support for MOBIKE

Yes. We shall only have one. Based on Hannes' analysis,
both options seem to provide the same functionality.
I am personally fine with either approach. Given that
we are writing a design draft, perhaps we should make
a design decision and pick one? It seems that a few people
preferred the Notify. I'm not sure I understood Tero's
objection to Vendor ID, but at least Notify sounds nicer.
Pick that and move one to the next issue?

--Jari

James Kempf wrote:
> I think we ought to choose either Vendor ID or Notify. While I support
> Notify (since this is a standardized, and not a vendor specific, option), I
> would rather go with Vendor ID if that's what a majority of the WG wants
> rather than have both.
> 
>             jak
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Dondeti, Lakshminath" <[email protected]>
> To: "Tschofenig Hannes" <[email protected]>
> Cc: "MOBIKE Mailing List" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>;
> "Tero Kivinen" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 10:23 AM
> Subject: Re: [Mobike] issue 4: how to signal support for MOBIKE
> 
> 
> 
>>This sounds good.  I was initially leaning toward Notify only, but there
>>is no harm in allowing Vendor ID.  I wouldn't necessarily suggest the
>>use of "critical bit" here.  Clearly, an implementation may choose to
>>use that feature, but there is no need to make that suggestion in each
>>context. Thanks.
>>
>>regards,
>>Lakshminath
>>
>>Tschofenig Hannes wrote:
>>
>>
>>>hi all,
>>>
>>>i went thought about the two most important options: notify and vendor
> 
> id
> 
>>>they both seem to provide the same capability. notify is used for
>>>errors but
>>>also for indicating sender capabilities. the same is true for the
>>>vendor id.
>>>
>>>
>>>as a text proposal i suggest to enhance the text offered by jari as
>>>follows:
>>>
>>>-----------------------
>>>
>>>X. Indicating Support for MOBIKE
>>>
>>>A node needs to be able to guarantee that its address change messages
> 
> are
> 
>>>understood by the peer. Otherwise an address change may render the
>>>connection useless, and it is important that both sides realize this as
>>>early as possible.
>>>
>>>Ensuring that the messages are understood can in be arranged either by
>>>marking some IKEv2 payloads critical so that they are either processed
>>>or an
>>>error message is returned, by using Vendor ID payloads or via a Notify.
>>>
>>>The first solution approach is to use Vendor ID payloads during the
>>>initial
>>>IKEv2 exchange using a specific string denoting MOBIKE to signal the
>>>support
>>>of the MOBIKE protocol. This ensures that in all cases a MOBIKE
>>>capable node
>>>knows whether its peer supports MOBIKE or not.
>>>
>>>The second solution approach uses the Notify payload which is also
>>>used for
>>>NAT detection (via NAT_DETECTION_SOURCE_IP and
>>>NAT_DETECTION_DESTINATION_IP), .
>>>
>>>Both, a Vendor ID and a Notify payload, might be used to indicate the
>>>support of certain extensions.
>>>
>>>Note that the node could also attempt MOBIKE optimistically with the
>>>critical bit set to one when a movement has occurred. The drawback of
>>>this
>>>approach is, however, that the an unnecessary MOBIKE message round is
>>>introduced on the first movement.
>>>
>>>-----------------------
>>>
>>>ciao
>>>hannes
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: Tero Kivinen [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>>Sent: Dienstag, 30. November 2004 11:41
>>>>To: [email protected]
>>>>Cc: MOBIKE Mailing List
>>>>Subject: [Mobike] issue 4: how to signal support for MOBIKE
>>>>
>>>>Jari Arkko writes:
>>>>
>>>>>So I would suggest that we use the Vendor ID approach.
>>>>
>>>>I would suggest NOTIFY approach. I.e we send notify saying
>>>>MOBIKE_SUPPORTED and thats it. Similar thatn what is done for
>>>>the NAT-T or the IPCOMP_SUPPORTED or USE_TRANSPORT_MODE etc.
>>>>
>>>>In most cases we do not want to fail the negotiation even if
>>>>the other end does not support MOBIKE, we simply revert back
>>>>to redoing the authentication every time IP-addresses changes.
>>>>
>>>>If our final protocol is going to use notifies to send the
>>>>IP-addresses, then we can use those notifies to signal the
>>>>use of MOBIKE instead of separate MOBIKE_SUPPORTED notify.
>>>>--
>>>>[email protected]
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>Mobike mailing list
>>>>[email protected]
>>>>https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike
>>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Mobike mailing list
>>>[email protected]
>>>https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike
>>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Mobike mailing list
>>[email protected]
>>https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike
>>
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mobike mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike
> 
>